AMD Radeon HD 6950 vs AMD Radeon HD 8690M Comparison

AMD Radeon HD 6950 vs AMD Radeon HD 8690M benchmark analysis: the desktop-focused HD 6950 edges out the mobile-oriented HD 8690M in the sole available OpenCL test, but the two cards occupy the same performance percentile overall. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 6210 for the HD 6950 versus 6137 for the HD 8690M yields a narrow 1.2% delta, a margin that falls well within run-to-run variance for most workloads. Both GPUs sit at the 36th percentile among all GPUs in the database, meaning they perform equivalently against the broader market despite their architectural differences.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison in the data is the Geekbench OpenCL test, where the AMD Radeon HD 6950 scores 6210 against 6137 for the AMD Radeon HD 8690M. This 1.2% advantage for the HD 6950 is the sole head-to-head win in the dataset, giving it a 1–0 record in direct comparisons. In practical terms, a 73-point gap out of roughly 6200 total points is negligible; the delta is smaller than the difference between the HD 6950 and its own nearest rival, the AMD FirePro W600, which scores 6223 and trails by just 0.2%.

Looking at the broader rival context, the HD 6950’s nearest competitors include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 at 6270 (0.9% ahead) and the NVIDIA Quadro K620 at 6282 (1.1% ahead). The HD 8690M’s nearest rivals are generally lower-scoring: the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 at 6117 trails by 0.3%, while the NVIDIA RTX A400 at 6078 and the NVIDIA GeForce MX230 at 6077 each sit about 1% behind. Notably, the HD 8690M’s rival list includes the HD 6950 itself at 6210, which is 1.2% ahead — the same margin seen in the head-to-head test.

The data suggests that both cards deliver nearly identical raw compute throughput in the OpenCL workload. For applications that stress general-purpose GPU compute, the 1.2% edge of the HD 6950 is unlikely to translate into a perceptible user experience difference. The similarity in percentile ranking (36th for both) reinforces that these are not competitors in different performance classes; they are peers separated by a hair in synthetic testing.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is substantial. The HD 6950 uses the Cayman chip built on TeraScale 3, fabricated on a 40 nm process at TSMC, while the HD 8690M uses the Sun chip with GCN 1.0 architecture on a 28 nm process, also at TSMC. The node shrink from 40 nm to 28 nm is significant, but the HD 6950 compensates with a much larger physical implementation: 2,640 million transistors spread across a 389 mm² die, versus 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die for the HD 8690M. This yields a transistor density of 6.8M per mm² for the HD 6950 and 12.3M per mm² for the HD 8690M — the newer process allows nearly double the packing density.

Compute resources differ dramatically. The HD 6950 features 1,408 shading units, 88 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs, while the HD 8690M has 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. Consequently, the pixel rate for the HD 6950 is 25.60 GPixel/s versus 7.800 GPixel/s for the HD 8690M, and texture rate is 70.40 GTexel/s versus 19.50 GTexel/s. Floating-point performance follows the same pattern: the HD 6950 delivers 2.253 TFLOPS FP32, while the HD 8690M manages 624.0 GFLOPS — a 3.6x gap in raw compute throughput.

Memory subsystems also diverge sharply. The HD 6950 uses a 256-bit bus with 2 GB of GDDR5 at 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective), yielding 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The HD 8690M has a 64-bit bus with 2 GB of GDDR5 at 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective), producing just 32.00 GB/s — one-fifth the bandwidth of the desktop card. Clock speeds tell a different story: the HD 8690M runs at 925 MHz base and 975 MHz boost, whereas the HD 6950’s core clock is not listed, though its memory clock is higher.

Architectural generation matters beyond raw counts. The HD 6950 belongs to the Northern Islands (HD 6900) generation with TeraScale 3, supporting DirectX 11.2 (11_0), OpenGL 4.4, and no Vulkan. The HD 8690M is from the Solar System (HD 8600M) generation with GCN 1.0, supporting DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The GCN architecture brings modern API support that TeraScale 3 lacks, which can affect compatibility with newer software even if the older card has superior peak throughput.

The Verdict

From the data alone, the AMD Radeon HD 6950 wins the only direct benchmark, but the 1.2% margin is too small to declare a meaningful performance victor. Both cards sit at the 36th percentile, and their nearest rival lists show overlapping performance neighborhoods. The HD 6950 is 0.2% behind the AMD FirePro W600, while the HD 8690M is 0.3% ahead of the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 — these are all within a 1% band of each other.

The real differentiators are architectural. The HD 6950 offers 3.6x the FP32 throughput, 3.3x the texture rate, and 5x the memory bandwidth of the HD 8690M. If the workload scales with these raw resources, the HD 6950 should pull ahead substantially in fill-rate-limited or bandwidth-heavy tasks, despite the modest OpenCL score difference. Conversely, the HD 8690M’s GCN 1.0 architecture and modern API support (DirectX 12, Vulkan 1.2.170) make it more future-proof for software that leverages these interfaces.

For a user choosing between these two, the HD 6950 is the pick for compute-heavy or fill-rate-sensitive applications where its larger shader count and wider memory bus can be exploited. The HD 8690M is the choice when API compatibility with modern titles or compute frameworks matters more than peak throughput. The HD 6950’s 200 W TDP and dual-slot design with 2x 6-pin power connectors indicate a desktop card requiring a 550 W PSU, while the HD 8690M has no listed power draw or physical dimensions, consistent with a mobile part that fits into laptops without external power.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon HD 6950 | AMD Radeon HD 8690M |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | TeraScale 3 | GCN 1.0 |

| Process Node | 40 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 2,640 million | 690 million |

| Die Size | 389 mm² | 56 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 6.8M / mm² | 12.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | — | 925 MHz |

| Boost Clock | — | 975 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1250 MHz (5 Gbps) | 1000 MHz (4 Gbps) |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 160.0 GB/s | 32.00 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1408 | 320 |

| TMUs | 88 | 20 |

| ROPs | 32 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 25.60 GPixel/s | 7.800 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 70.40 GTexel/s | 19.50 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 2.253 TFLOPS | 624.0 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 200 W | — |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | — |

| Power Connectors | 2x 6-pin | — |

| Suggested PSU | 550 W | — |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 2x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 | — |

| DirectX | 11.2 (11_0) | 12 (11_1) |

| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | — | 1.2.170 |

| Dimensions | 286 mm x 126 mm x 42 mm | — |

| Release Date | 2010-12-13 | 2013-02-28 |

| Launch MSRP | 299 USD | — |

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 6950 scores 6210, which is 1.2% higher than the HD 8690M’s 6137.

Q: How does the memory bandwidth compare between the two cards?

A: The HD 6950 has 160.0 GB/s bandwidth from a 256-bit bus, while the HD 8690M has 32.00 GB/s from a 64-bit bus — a 5x difference in favor of the HD 6950.

Q: Which GPU supports modern APIs like Vulkan?

A: Only the HD 8690M supports Vulkan (version 1.2.170). The HD 6950 supports DirectX 11.2 and OpenGL 4.4, but no Vulkan.

Q: What is the transistor count difference?

A: The HD 6950 has 2,640 million transistors on a 389 mm² die, while the HD 8690M has 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die.

Q: Are these GPUs in the same performance percentile?

A: Yes, both are at the 36th percentile among all GPUs, indicating they perform similarly relative to the broader market.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each card?

A: For the HD 6950, the nearest rival is the AMD FirePro W600 at 6223 (0.2% behind). For the HD 8690M, the nearest rival is the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 at 6117 (0.3% behind).

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon HD 6950 wins in scenarios that demand raw compute throughput and memory bandwidth. Its 2.253 TFLOPS FP32 performance is 3.6x that of the HD 8690M’s 624.0 GFLOPS, so any OpenCL or compute workload that scales with shader count — such as physics simulations, video processing, or scientific number crunching — will favor the older desktop card. The 160.0 GB/s memory bandwidth versus 32.00 GB/s also gives it a decisive edge in texture-heavy rendering or large dataset operations that are bandwidth-bound. The pixel rate of 25.60 GPixel/s and texture rate of 70.40 GTexel/s further support its advantage in fill-rate-limited graphics tasks.

The AMD Radeon HD 8690M wins in software compatibility and power efficiency. Its GCN 1.0 architecture supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170, whereas the HD 6950 is limited to DirectX 11.2 and OpenGL 4.4 with no Vulkan support. For users running recent games or compute frameworks that require Vulkan, the HD 8690M is the only viable option between the two. The 28 nm process node and smaller die (56 mm² versus 389 mm²) suggest lower power consumption, though no TDP is listed for the HD 8690M. Additionally, the HD 8690M supports PCIe 3.0 x8, which is a newer bus interface than the HD 6950’s PCIe 2.0 x16, potentially offering better data transfer efficiency in compatible systems.

For mobile use, the HD 8690M is the clear choice as it has no listed dimensions or power connectors, indicating an integrated or MXM-style laptop part. The HD 6950’s dual-slot design, 286 mm length, and 2x 6-pin power connectors require a desktop chassis and a 550 W PSU. If the use case is a fixed desktop workstation with available power, the HD 6950’s superior specs make it the stronger performer; if the use case is a portable laptop, the HD 8690M is the only sensible option despite its lower peak throughput.